3.8 Article

Optimizing a sustainable logistics problem in a renewable energy network using agenetic algorithm

期刊

OPSEARCH
卷 56, 期 1, 页码 73-90

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s12597-019-00356-5

关键词

Sustainable supply chains management; Carbon tax; Genetic algorithm; Mixed integer linear programming model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Renewable energy sources, including bio-energy technologies, have been introduced to overcome sustainability challenges, such as negative environmental impacts and energy insecurity due to reliance on fossil fuels. Logistics activities have a significant effect on the cost and environmental impacts of renewable energy supply chains. Understanding and reducing the carbon footprint of renewable energy supply chains can aid in mitigating environmental impacts. Thus, this research presents a mathematical model that can be used to optimize renewable energy supply chain logistics costs and carbon footprint. The proposed model considers a biomass-to-bio-oil supply chain, including harvesting and collection sites, bio-refineries, and distribution centers. It is assumed that mobile and fixed refineries will be used to produce bio-oil. The model considers the mass of biomass and bio-oil, number of mobile and fixed refineries, and number of truck trips to minimize total cost, where a carbon tax is used to represent carbon footprint in the mathematical cost model. A genetic algorithm is designed to obtain a near-optimal solution. Six scenarios for mobile and fixed refinery capacity are tested in performing sensitivity analysis of the model. The results indicate that the mathematical model of the bio-oil supply chain has reasonable relationships between input and output variables. The model is able to incorporate the impact of carbon emissions in a mixed-refinery bio-oil supply chain as a cost parameter. It was also found that increasing mobile refinery capacity has the greater effect on reducing total cost and carbon emissions than increasing fixed refinery capacity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据